SPEAKER_00 0:00

The Domesday Book 1086. The Domesday Book is not a chronicle. It does not tell the story of a battle or the reign of a king in order of days. It is a descriptive survey of landed England, compiled in 1086 on the order of William I, set down in Latin, highly abbreviated, and kept thereafter as a reference of record. Later ages gave it the name by which it is now known. In the 12th century, a treasurer's clerk could already treat the book as something like a last accounting. What was written there was not to be contradicted. The nickname stuck. The work itself remains what it was commissioned to be: an inquiry into who held what, on what assessment, and at what value, in the time of King Edward, and in the time of King William. England in 1086 had been under Norman rule for twenty years. The old West Saxon dynasty had ended at Hastings. Land had changed hands on a scale that no earlier English king had managed in a single generation. A land tax, the Geld, still existed as an instrument the crown could levy. Castles, sheriffs, and a new aristocracy sat on an older framework of shires, hundreds, and manners. The king needed to know, in a form that could be consulted, how that framework now looked. The survey was the method. The method was an inquest. Commissioners were sent out by circuits, groups of shires taken together. They did not wander field to field with measuring chains. They sat where the hundred already sat. The hundred was the old subdivision of the Shire, a court and a district before it was a line on a map. Jurors were sworn, men of the hundred, and often a mix of English and French names in the same panel, and they answered a set of questions that can be reconstructed from the finished book, and from a related text known as the Ely Inquest. The questions ran in a fixed order, or near enough to one. What is the manor called? Who held it in the time of King Edward? Who holds it now? How many hides? How many ploughs the land has room for? How many ploughs are there in the Lord's hands, and how many belonging to the men? How many villains, bordars, slaves? How much meadow, pasture, woodland, how many mills, how many fisheries? What it was worth and what it is worth. Whether more can be had from it than is had. Hyde is the first unit that needs a slow explanation, because it is the unit on which so many answers turn. In much of southern and midland England, the Hide was the traditional assessment for public burdens. It was not a measured acreage in the modern sense, though later writers like to say that a hide was 120 acres. Some hides were heavy on the ground, and some were light. A well-stocked manor might be assessed at few hides, a poor one might be assessed at many. The hide was a fiscal idea that had settled onto the landscape, not a surveyor's chain laid out from a datum. When Domesday says that a manor is assessed at five hides, it is reporting that official idea as the jurors knew it. In the north and east, in the country that had known Danish settlement, the equivalent unit was often the karakate, the plowland is a unit of account. A karakate in principle was the land of one plow team. Eight bovates made a karakate in many districts, a bovate being an ox gang, the strip associated with one beast in an eight-ox team. The book does not pause to teach this arithmetic, it assumes it. A reader who wants to move through the entries without stumbling, has to carry the arithmetic along. Ploughs in the text are both teams and a measure of capacity. There is land for eight plows, is a statement about how much arable the jurors thought the manor could take. In lordship there are two plows, and the men have six is a statement about teams actually at work, divided between the demismi, the lord's own land, and the land of the tenants. When the two statements do not match, the book simply sets them side by side. Lamb for eight plows and only five teams present is a manor not fully in work. Land for four and six teams present is a manor crowded on its arable, or a set of figures that do not quite fit. The commissioners did not write essays about the discrepancy. They recorded both numbers. The people in the entries are grouped by status, not by name, except for the tenant in chief, and the under-tenant who hold of him. Villains are the main body of customary tenants in many shires, householders with a share in the fields, owing labor and dues that the book does not usually specify. Bordars and Khadars are smaller householders, often with less land. Slaves survey are listed where they were still counted as persons in the Lord's hands, rather than as tenants. Free men and silkmen appear thickly in the East, a reminder that the Dane law had a different texture of personal status. The book is not a census of souls, it is a census of those categories as they bore on the working of land and the taking of dues. Women appear when they hold land. Children do not appear. The inner life of a household is outside the headings. Woodland is measured in more than one way, which is a small education in itself. In some shires it is given by so many swine the wood could feed, because panage, the autumn feeding of pigs en mast, was the useful fact. In others it is given in leagues of length and breadth, a rough rectangle. Meadow, which mattered for hay and therefore for the oxen that pulled the ploughs, is often in acres. Pasture may be for the livestock of the ville. A mill is commonly a mill on a stream, valued in shillings, sometimes shared between manners. A fishery may be a weir, salt pans appear on the coasts and in the Worcestershire witches. These items sit in the same sentence rhythm as the hides and the ploughs. The book does not raise its voice for a mill, it names it and prices it. Value is given in pounds, shillings, and pence, the ordinary English money of account. Many entries offer three figures, or two. The value in the time of King Edward, the value when the present holder received the manor, and the value now. The middle figure is a mark of the conquest, as an administrative event. Land had passed, sometimes it had been wasted in the passing, sometimes it had been stalked again. A fall in value after 1066 is common in shires that saw fighting or the deliberate harrying of a countryside. A rise is common where a new holder had put in teams and men. The book does not moralize the rise or the fall, it writes it was worth forty shillings, now sixty, and goes on to the next manor. Geld, the land tax, stands behind much of this. England had long been assessed in hides for the paying of a tax that could be taken at so much per hide. William needed to know the assessment and the present capacity together, because a tax list that no longer matched the land was a poor tool, and because the crown had claims not only as taxer, but as feudal lord. Historians have argued, at leisure and at length, whether Domesday is primarily a geld book, primarily a feudal directory of who held of the king, or both at once. The argument is possible because the book contains the materials for both uses, and does not include a preface that settles the matter. What it contains is enough for a working king, a manner can be found, its assessment read, its stock and value compared across twenty years. The finished product is two volumes of different habit. Little Domesday covers Essex, Norfolk, and Suffolk. It is the larger book in bulk for those three shires, Fuller in Livestock, and in the small change of Freeman and Soakmen. It looks like a stage of the work that was never boiled down. Great Domesday covers most of the rest of the surveyed kingdom, written in a more compressed hand, with livestock often omitted and phrasing cut to a formula. The usual account is that the Eastern booklet remained unabbreviated when time ran out, and that the main volume is the abbreviation as completed. The scribes wrote in a formal bookhand, in columns with red for rubrics. Placenames are Latinized, or left in a clerk's version of the English and French forms. A reader who knows the modern map must learn the clerk's map. Not all of England is there, the far north is absent, or only thinly present. London and Winchester, the great royal towns, are not described in the way a rural manner is described. Some lands of the king and of the church are handled in ways that differ from the ordinary lay manner. Circumstance and privilege both leave holes. The book is a survey of what the inquest reached, and what the compilers had time to enter. It is not a modern national inventory. The order inside a shire is not the order of a gazetteer. Land is grouped by tenant in chief. The king's land comes first, then the great church holdings, then the lay barons, in an order that is not alphabetical, and not simply by size. To find a village one must know who held it, or use a later index. This feudal grouping is itself information. It shows the kingdom as a set of honors and fees laid over the older villages. The village is still there, as a villains and its mill. The heading is the name of a man who may live far from that mill. The conquest appears in the book as a change of names in those headings. An English holder in the time of King Edward is followed by a Norman, a Breton, a Fleming, or a royal official now. Sometimes the same man or his widow is still there. Sometimes a group of free men has become the following of a new lord. The violence that produced those changes is off the page. On the page there is only the before, and the after, and the values that moved with them. For a sleeplong reading, that restraint is the point. Twenty years of dispossession become a pair of clauses. The materials behind the finished volumes were many. There were the jurors' verdicts, oral, and then noted. There were older lists, guild rolls, estate inventories, church records that could be produced when a figure was disputed. There were the commissioners' returns, circuit by circuit, which do not survive as a set. There is the satellite text from Ely, which preserves questions and answers in a form closer to the inquiry. There are related local documents, the so-called satellites, which show the same data and other arrangements. Great Domesday is the end of a process of compression. Compression leaves out the argument in the hundred court. It leaves the result. A manor in this language is not always a single house in a park. It is a unit of lordship and account. It may coincide with a village, it may be only a piece of a village, or a scatter of appurtenances in more than one vill. An appurtenance is a piece of meadow or a berowick, an outlying dependency that belongs to the head manor for purposes of dues. Domesday is full of such attachments. They are the reason a neat map of manors is harder to draw than a neat map of villes. The book was not drawn as a map, it was written as a sequence of paragraphs. Woodland swine, meadow acres, and the odd salt pan will carry a reader a long way, if the paragraphs are taken in order. So will the mills. A mill valued at five shillings, another at twelve, a third shared two parts of a mill, these are the industrial sentences of an agrarian kingdom. The mill is a wheel and a pair of stones, and a right to take multure, the toll on grain. Domesday does not describe the wheel, it registers the right and the income. That is the level at which the whole book works. The later life of the volumes is quiet. They passed into the exchequer, the accounting office of the crown, and were kept with the kind of care given to a tool that still had uses. Lawyers in later centuries appealed to them to show ancient domain, a special status of manners that had been in the king's hand in 1086. Antiquaries copied extracts. The binding in the name grew more solemn than the original clerks may have intended. The text remained a set of abbreviations about ploughs. In that sense, the book has never changed character. It was dry when it was new. To read a single shire slowly is to see the formula tighten. The first entries in a circuit may be a little fuller. Then the scribe's patience, or his instructions, reduced the manor to a drumbeat. X holds Y. It answered for N hides. There is land for P ploughs. In Lordship Q the men are. There are so many villains, so many bordars, a mill of S shillings, woodland for T swine, it was worth a pounds, now B. The next manor. The drumbeat is not a defect. It is the work, a night's reading that stays inside one hundred, then the next hundred, will find only rare breaks, a note that the land is waste, a note that the jurors say the hundred has never seen the writ, a note that two holders dispute. Even the disputes are short. Waste is a word the book uses without soonery. In the northern shires that William's armies had gone through in the winters after the conquest, many villes are waste, or nearly so, with no teams, or with a value collapsed to a few shillings. The page does not describe burned timber or empty buyers, it records the absence of the usual numbers. Absence, repeated down a column, is its own kind of description. Farther south, the word appears more locally: a manor unstocked when received, a piece of plowland not in use. The reader is left to infer weather war or neglect. The commissioners inferred nothing in writing. Towns sit awkwardly in the scheme. A borough has burgesses, mints, customary dues, houses attached to rural manners, sometimes a wall. The headings designed for a manner only half fit. The clerks do what they can. They list the number of houses, the renders, the presence of a market. The result is less systematic than the rural entries, and therefore a little slower to read, not faster. The eye looks for the plows that are not there and finds instead a render in honey or iron or coined money. Measures of length in the woodland entries. Leagues, furlongs are not surveyors' precision. A league in this usage is a rough country measure, often taken as a mile and a half in later school books, though the Domesday League is a debated length. The book is content with one league long and half a league broad. The rectangle is a gesture toward extent. It is enough for a treasury that wants to know whether the wood is large or small. What the book will not do is tell how the fields were arranged. Open fields, strips, ridge and furrow, the rotation of crops, these are the everyday geometry of the same villes, and they are almost entirely off stage. A plough implies a field, a meadow implies a low ground cut for hay. The rest must be borrowed from other kinds of evidence. Domesday is already long without the strips. Its business is lordship, assessment, stock, and value. A sleep essay that stays with its business will not lack matter. There are more manners than a knight can hold. By the close of 1086, or shortly after, the main writing had been done, William left England and did not return. The book remained. It did not set rents for all time. It did not freeze the list of tenants. Land would pass again by grant and by inheritance and by forfeiture. The value now would become another then. What the volumes fixed was a picture of a kingdom at one inquiry. The names of the new holders laid over the old assessments, the ploughs counted, the mills priced, the woodland reckoned in swine or in leagues. A picture of that kind is made to be consulted, not recited. Recited anyway, one entry after another, it has the pace of a ledger being read aloud in a quiet room. That is the use of Domesday for a long hearing. Not the conquest as a single day, and not the nickname as a piece of thunder. A circuit, a hundred, a list of questions. Hide and caricate, ploughs in lordship and ploughs of the men, villains border, slave socamen, meadow, wood, mill, salt pan. Worth then, worth now. Turn the leaf. The next manor has another name and the same headings. The headings are the point. They were made to be the same so that a king's servant looking down a column could find the same fact in the same place. A servant of that kind was not in a hurry to be interested. He was in a hurry to be accurate enough. Accuracy of that order is slow. It lists, it stops.